• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

I hope some of you read / listened / saw some of the comments from the Al Smith Memorial Dinner last night. From what I saw on the news this morning, Trump was actually booed for his attempts at humor/roast of Hillary. However Hillary was applauded many times even after she wasn't so warmly welcomed to the dias. One of her lines was "when Donald looks at the Statue of Liberty, he would rate her a 4. Maybe a 5 if she lost the torch & tablet then did something with her hair." She also made several self-depreciating stabs too, like she was happy to cram this dinner into her rigorous nap schedule - and usually I charge a lot of money for these types of speeches.
 
Planit said:
I hope some of you read / listened / saw some of the comments from the Al Smith Memorial Dinner last night. From what I saw on the news this morning, Trump was actually booed for his attempts at humor/roast of Hillary. However Hillary was applauded many times even after she wasn't so warmly welcomed to the dias. One of her lines was "when Donald looks at the Statue of Liberty, he would rate her a 4. Maybe a 5 if she lost the torch & tablet then did something with her hair." She also made several self-depreciating stabs too, like she was happy to cram this dinner into her rigorous nap schedule - and usually I charge a lot of money for these types of speeches.
Click to expand...

I saw a few clips of it here and there and while I don't really care about it one way or another I did like Trump's joke that he bumped into Clinton in the hallway before the dinner and she said "Pardon me"... though that joke doesn't come across nearly as well typed out as it does spoken (I also liked the delayed, but hardy, laugh that that particular joke received from the attendees).

One other comment about the dinner was that Clinton looked much more natural and relaxed giving her monologue while Trump looked visibly tired and unhappy and appeared to be reading from his notes almost entirely. This is only noteworthy to me because I consider him to basically be an entertainer these days and he should be right at home at something like this but it looked like he didn't care to be there or prepare at all. I imagine he was not thrilled to be speaking in front of a crowd that wasn't filled with his supporters, especially after many of his comments and his behavior this campaign.
 
yyeztkciba2ptd74fcwkpcsfkqe1yxwh1hvpkrq0koizyw7qrftpz5p0joq95jt1.jpg
 
michaelskis said:
Here is a rundown of what is subsidised per state.
https://farm.ewg.org/

Furthermore, here is a rundown on how those crops are used
http://grist.org/food/our-crazy-farm-subsidies-explained/

My point is if we are going to fund these farms, why not fund something that you can eat directly that has a higher nutritional content, thus resulting lower food costs and a healthier population. Think about your grocery bill. What is more expensive healthy food or junk food? Yes, different states have different production options, Cherries grow better than Oranges in Michigan, but every state has something that has a high nutrient content that they could grow. However, the federal government provides incentives for them to grow other stuff, or nothing at all.

I also think that it could do a better job of funding urban farming projects like those in Detroit or Milwaukee.
Click to expand...

I'm no expert in farming so I'll let people who have to deal with it make the arguments and tell me I'm wrong. In general I don't like the idea of subsidies. If it were a good thing we wouldn't have to subsidize it. Then again, some things you have to have gumint help on since it's needed for some safety reason or in the case of farming to actually feed people. I can agree with subsidies that get us selected foods we want to see more of and to continue helping the family farm to survive, but I don't like the idea of the gubmint controlling the market. Just because the FDA says I should eat more veg and whole grains doesn't mean they should give money to those farmers while ignoring things like feed crops for pigs and cattle which would drive up pork prices or sugar crops because sugar is bad for me (I'm talking real sugar, not the corn syrup stuff). I also hate the idea of subsidizing corporate farms. If it's profitable, even just a little bit, then you don't need my tax dollar. It's still hard to argue though. So many farmers in Kansas depend on it and they don't allow corporate farms here. Without these farmers and the subsidies they get to help out, you don't eat. It's one thing to say you need lettuce or some vegetable, but this is the wheat that feeds us. Considering this state produces 17% of the nations wheat and 33% of the nations sorghum I'm not sure I want to screw that up. On the embarrassing side, Kansas only produces 3% of the nations sunflowers and they call themselves the sunflower state. So like anything, maybe it's time to start some farm bill reforms. We'll get on that right after the tax code, health care, vets, wars, and whatever else we have to deal with that neither candidate seems to be talking about.

WSU MUP Student said:
I saw a few clips of it here and there and while I don't really care about it one way or another I did like Trump's joke that he bumped into Clinton in the hallway before the dinner and she said "Pardon me"... though that joke doesn't come across nearly as well typed out as it does spoken (I also liked the delayed, but hardy, laugh that that particular joke received from the attendees).

One other comment about the dinner was that Clinton looked much more natural and relaxed giving her monologue while Trump looked visibly tired and unhappy and appeared to be reading from his notes almost entirely. This is only noteworthy to me because I consider him to basically be an entertainer these days and he should be right at home at something like this but it looked like he didn't care to be there or prepare at all. I imagine he was not thrilled to be speaking in front of a crowd that wasn't filled with his supporters, especially after many of his comments and his behavior this campaign.
Click to expand...

On the good point for Trump, he did laugh at himself when Hill made jokes about him. Giuliani didn't.


Okay, I read through my sample ballot. The big issues for Kansas:

Retaining or not retaining our judges. The big push is based on a horrible murder case they pulled the death penalty from because of a technicality. Some groups are pushing the anti abortion reason to get rid of the judges. The real reason this is an issue, Gov. Brownback has had his school funding bill crushed multiple times by the judges as against the Kansas constitution so why not get rid of those annoying judges who are meddling in the affairs of the legislative branch (we don't like checks and balances here). Of course we want to keep the couple judges that Brownback appointed who are the worst rated judges by independent panels or lawyers and people in the know.

The other issue is a constitutional change to hunting that gives people the right to hunt in Kansas. It looks all well and good. If it doesn't pass, nothing changes and we keep hunting the way we want to. If it does pass then hunting regulations are held under "strict scrutiny" which means trying to protect the poor lesser prairie chicken will be near impossible.
 
dvdneal said:
I'm no expert in farming so I'll let people who have to deal with it make the arguments and tell me I'm wrong... On the embarrassing side, Kansas only produces 3% of the nations sunflowers and they call themselves the sunflower state. So like anything, maybe it's time to start some farm bill reforms. We'll get on that right after the tax code, health care, vets, wars, and whatever else we have to deal with that neither candidate seems to be talking about.
Click to expand...

[OT]Interesting! This inspired me to look into it and I discovered that Utah, The Beehive State, produced less than 1% of the nation's honey in 2015. What's up with that Ursus?[/OT]
 
WSU MUP Student said:
[OT]Interesting! This inspired me to look into it and I discovered that Utah, The Beehive State, produced less than 1% of the nation's honey in 2015. What's up with that Ursus?[/OT]
Click to expand...

Well, he is a bear.:teddybear: He might be stockpiling it for the winter. Dang, whenever I see Ursus, I'm going to think of Poo Bear.
 
JNA said:
14725512_10155399097678327_429592958356281756_n.png
Click to expand...

So we can blame Trump and Clinton on people who don't vote?






I have not been following the wikileaks thing all that much. How much of the information against is false and how much is true?



Richmond Jake said:
I Bing searched Jessica Drake. She has at least one tattoo. :6:
Click to expand...


Seeing some of the woman who claimed that Trump has assaulted them, I really question their comments. Seeing her, I have no doubt he was all over her.
 
I'm Done! Free from worrying about voting anymore. I walked next door and did my early voting thing. Now I don't have to think about it ever again.

Really should be a national holiday or at least a holiday for people who actually vote.
 
dvdneal said:
I'm Done! Free from worrying about voting anymore. I walked next door and did my early voting thing. Now I don't have to think about it ever again.

Really should be a national holiday or at least a holiday for people who actually vote.
Click to expand...

All I have to do to early vote is to go downstairs.

Around here The Man gives us election day off as a holiday, and by applying RJ math, I am taking Monday off thus making it a 4 day weekend. :D
 
michaelskis said:
Seeing some of the woman who claimed that Trump has assaulted them, I really question their comments. Seeing her, I have no doubt he was all over her.
Click to expand...

Not to be all feminist or whatever, but I can't let this comment go unchecked. Sexual assault isn't really about lust (although that may be a component of it). It's about power and entitlement. How the women look should have no bearing on how seriously to take their accounts.
 
gtpeach said:
Not to be all feminist or whatever, but I can't let this comment go unchecked. Sexual assault isn't really about lust (although that may be a component of it). It's about power and entitlement. How the women look should have no bearing on how seriously to take their accounts.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Assault like that isn't about looks so much. It's about power and control. A pretty ignorant comment really.
 
gtpeach said:
Not to be all feminist or whatever, but I can't let this comment go unchecked. Sexual assault isn't really about lust (although that may be a component of it). It's about power and entitlement. How the women look should have no bearing on how seriously to take their accounts.
Click to expand...

The one that I am think of said it was more of a lust situation where she pushed away unwelcome sexual advances.


A neighbor from a few blocks over asked me who I am voting for last night. He flipped out because I wasn't going to vote for Hillary and said that I have to because she is a woman. Would you classify that as sexism or assault?

The Affordable Care Act... such a nice sounding name.

However today it was announced that some policies will be going up by as much as 25%. (LINK)

It is time to repeal this garbage. I said it was bad legislation when it was introduced, that it would not result in healthcare being affordable and today the numbers prove that to be true.
 
michaelskis said:
The one that I am think of said it was more of a lust situation where she pushed away unwelcome sexual advances.
Click to expand...

All sexual assault is unwelcome sexual advances. It doesn't mean the motivation is pure lust. Again, entitlement and power. It also doesn't excuse the idea that a woman's attractiveness has any impact on the likelihood that she's telling the truth when she claims she is sexually assaulted. Sorry, but you're wrong on this one, and I'm not going to give anyone any slack on that.


Maybe it was verbal assault - I don't know exactly what was said. Maybe it was sexism, I don't know. Definitely not feminism. Doesn't make any excuses for sexual assault of any kind, though.
 
gtpeach said:
All sexual assault is unwelcome sexual advances. It doesn't mean the motivation is pure lust. Again, entitlement and power. It also doesn't excuse the idea that a woman's attractiveness has any impact on the likelihood that she's telling the truth when she claims she is sexually assaulted. Sorry, but you're wrong on this one, and I'm not going to give anyone any slack on that.


Maybe it was verbal assault - I don't know exactly what was said. Maybe it was sexism, I don't know. Definitely not feminism. Doesn't make any excuses for sexual assault of any kind, though.
Click to expand...

I am not arguing, I am just trying to get a better understanding of your defintion.

And I guess it might just be me, but when I was single, I would never pursue someone who I did not find attractive. However I have never been accused of sexual assault before. There is zero doubt that what Trump did was wrong and that he should be prosecuted for it. I have said that before. But I do not think that every woman who is saying that she was assaulted actually was. Most of them, likely, but not all of them especially right before a presidential election when it guarantees that they will get attention from the national media.


I agree that it was sexest what my neighbor said, and he has categorized himself as a male feminist. How do you define feminism?
 
michaelskis said:
I am not arguing, I am just trying to get a better understanding of your defintion.

And I guess it might just be me, but when I was single, I would never pursue someone who I did not find attractive. However I have never been accused of sexual assault before. There is zero doubt that what Trump did was wrong and that he should be prosecuted for it. I have said that before. But I do not think that every woman who is saying that she was assaulted actually was. Most of them, likely, but not all of them especially right before a presidential election when it guarantees that they will get attention from the national media.


I agree that it was sexest what my neighbor said, and he has categorized himself as a male feminist. How do you define feminism?
Click to expand...

I think feminism is one of those vague terms. And it's not one I strongly identify with to be honest, because I think it has a lot of connotations for different people, and a lot of them are unproductive and unhelpful. For me, I associate feminism with the idea of recognizing that there are certain gender-based power advantages even still today, and working to address those power imbalances. Examples include double standards for men and women that are aggressive in pursuing career advancement. It's often seen as a negative for women and a positive for men. Or tenure track issues that work against women who choose to have children that stay home with their children. Or "maternity" leave policies that protect women when they want to stay home for several weeks after having children to return to work, but fail to provide that same protection to men.

I don't know if all the women that claim to be sexually assaulted were. We really can't know that unless there's some sort of trial. My point is questioning the truthfulness of what's being said based on attractiveness misses the point. I will say I'm a fairly average looking woman, and I've been assaulted. And it was partially the idea that I'd have to look a certain way in order to be a target for assault that prevented me from realizing that was what had happened for a long time. Think about how a man that felt entitled and wanted to feel powerful could use that against a woman that he victimized, "Go ahead and go to the cops. Think they'll believe you? Look at you. No one will believe that you'd say no to me."

It's also a dangerous popular notion that I hope is being challenged now that it's a man's job to see how far he can get, and it's a woman's job to stop him when she's had enough. I've had several boyfriends that bought into that philosophy, and you know what? It's exhausting to constantly be on the defense. And eventually you can get worn down if you don't nip it in the bud. And that's", not exactly consent.

For me, though, feminism isn't really about "I am woman, hear me roar." It's just acknowledging where there are power differentials or advantages that unfairly favor someone based on gender.

There's also a HUGE difference between feeling a woman out to see if she's interested, and then not caring if she's interested and just doing what you want anyway. One's consensual and based on respect. The other is a crime.
 
Dear Politician;
I wish you would not send me those crappy fliers accusing your opponent of whatever. They go directly into the trash or recycling. Your are wasting money (or does this count as experience when you get in office and waste money?). Besides I've already voted & I can't change my vote because that would mean the election is rigged.
Thank you.
 
dvdneal said:
I'm Done! Free from worrying about voting anymore. I walked next door and did my early voting thing. Now I don't have to think about it ever again.

Really should be a national holiday or at least a holiday for people who actually vote.
Click to expand...

The only people that would have the day off would be government employees. If I recall my dad got it off when he worked for Nabisco.
 
Planit said:
Besides I've already voted & I can't change my vote because that would mean the election is rigged.
Thank you.
Click to expand...

I voted by absentee ballot this year. I told my boss I was going to try to go to my polling place in person if I get back early enough on the 8th to see for myself if the election is rigged. ;)
 
I voted early, as usual. No line for check-in, available machines, everything worked. Walked out and there were 2 people waiting to check in. Must have timed it right!
 
Some Yuengling drinkers set down beer over Trump endorsement
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...et-down-beer-over-trump-endorsement/92844002/

Other headlines:
A Donald Trump endorsement just ruined Yuengling forever
https://mic.com/articles/157871/a-donald-trump-endorsement-just-ruined-yuengling-forever

Local businesses boycott Yuengling over Trump endorsement
https://www.washingtonblade.com/2016/10/27/jrs-gay-bars-boycott-yuengling-following-trump-support/


Would you boycott a product/brand based upon their endorsement of a candidate ?
 
JNA said:
Would you boycott a product/brand based upon their endorsement of a candidate ?
Click to expand...

No, I think that's one of the stupidest things anyone could do when it comes to making a political stand. I don't care what the position of the company is, as long as their product is good. I still ate Chick Fil A after their big gay fiasco, but I disagreed with it. It's ridiculous to think that the position of some CEO or owner of the company somehow reflects the position of the people working there as a whole.
 
I don't think so. Boycotting typically doesn't hurt the people it's intended to hurt. It ends up hurting the little guys on the bottom of the corporate structure more than anything.

I will, however, never spend my money on any Trump products directly. Not that I did before. I'm bummed he ended up developing the old Post Office in DC. Going to the top was always one of my favorite parts of visiting the city. Oh well.
 
I can't say I truly boycott anything, but I'm a little adverse to going to Chick-fil-a or Hobby Lobby partly because of their political stances. I don't like to do business with people or places I find reprehensible. Granted I don't eat at chick-fil-a much/ever, but if we're all going, I'll go to. With Hobby Lobby there are plenty of other places I can go instead, but once in a while I have to go there to get what I want. Personally I don't think corporations should be involved in politics. Just run your business. It's different if the owner of X Company wants to make a statement, he can do that for himself and not for the company (I say he because women are smarter than that). I'm even a little depressed that companies like Apple get involved, but they at least are trying to do the right thing and not take away people's rights.
 
dvdneal said:
I can't say I truly boycott anything, but I'm a little adverse to going to Chick-fil-a or Hobby Lobby partly because of their political stances. I don't like to do business with people or places I find reprehensible. Granted I don't eat at chick-fil-a much/ever, but if we're all going, I'll go to. With Hobby Lobby there are plenty of other places I can go instead, but once in a while I have to go there to get what I want. Personally I don't think corporations should be involved in politics. Just run your business. It's different if the owner of X Company wants to make a statement, he can do that for himself and not for the company (I say he because women are smarter than that). I'm even a little depressed that companies like Apple get involved, but they at least are trying to do the right thing and not take away people's rights.
Click to expand...

They're not a company, but there's a big issue going on here with Jerry Falwell, Jr's support of Donald Trump. He's the president of Liberty University (if you don't know about him already), and while he's gone on the record as speaking for himself and not for the university, the other faculty at the university are basically not given the same freedom of expression. So there is a bit of an issue even when it's the head of a company if that freedom is not directly protected for all the other faculty, staff, and even Board members that are affiliated. I have many friends that are professors that are very careful about what they say on Facebook or in their classes because they do not want to bring too much attention to their views and risk termination or demotion. And I know of specific situations where that has happened as a result of employees trying to take a stand for what is right and protecting their employees. I get so angry on behalf of my friends there.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...rty-university-christian-conservatives-214394
 
I've boycotted a handful of businesses, but just those where the corporate profits were going directly to fund evil causes (e.g. anti-LGBT organizations, as was the case with Chick-Fil-A). I understand that is no longer the case with Chick-Fil-A. Mr. Cathy (former Chick-Fil-A CEO) caught on quickly there was great potential to hurt the business' bottom line and decided instead to personally donate to those evil causes (which is his right). So mission accomplished: my Chick-Fil-A boycott no longer stands.
 
Maister said:
I've boycotted a handful of businesses, but just those where the corporate profits were going directly to fund evil causes (e.g. anti-LGBT organizations, as was the case with Chick-Fil-A). I understand that is no longer the case with Chick-Fil-A. Mr. Cathy (former Chick-Fil-A CEO) caught on quickly there was great potential to hurt the business' bottom line and decided instead to personally donate to those evil causes (which is his right). So mission accomplished: my Chick-Fil-A boycott no longer stands.
Click to expand...

That was easy for you given the lack of them near you.


For me, it really depends on what it is the owner oemail founder believes. Does the CEO of the bank that holds your mortgage support Trump? If so how is the refinancing to another bank going. In some cases boycotting makes a difference when it is convenient for someone, but when it pushes past that comfort level they fold like a house ofor cards.

It is when it creates a real struggle that it matters. Until then, it is just people being cry babes.
 
Reading the newspapers (websites) is depressing, but there's always some sense of irony. They do this & I don't (but evidence shows otherwise) - on both sides.

I saw this today - Hillary’s a crook! Believe her accusers! But mine are clearly lying! - and I thought to myself that one statement describes the entire campaign.
 
Well this is interesting. There are an increasing number of people who voted early who are now asking about how do they change their votes. However, it is people on both sides that are asking about it.

One week from Today, we will know who the next President of the United States will be. Last night I got a call from the NRA asking me to renew my membership. I asked him what they stance on background checks are, and he said that the NRA is opposed to any background checks of any type. I then informed him that as long as they hold that position, I will not be renewing my membership.
 
I enjoy how NPR is doing segments on voter fraud. They interview republican secretaries of state and get everyone to agree it isn't a problem.

Now if only the R candidate could stop staying the election is rigged.
 
michaelskis said:
Well this is interesting. There are an increasing number of people who voted early who are now asking about how do they change their votes. However, it is people on both sides that are asking about it.

One week from Today, we will know who the next President of the United States will be. Last night I got a call from the NRA asking me to renew my membership. I asked him what they stance on background checks are, and he said that the NRA is opposed to any background checks of any type. I then informed him that as long as they hold that position, I will not be renewing my membership.
Click to expand...

I think we should organize a whole bunch of people to join the NRA then kick out the current guy and return them to a group educating people about safe gun ownership and less of a lobbying group.
 
Hink said:
I enjoy how NPR is doing segments on voter fraud. They interview republican secretaries of state and get everyone to agree it isn't a problem.

Now if only the R candidate could stop staying the election is rigged.
Click to expand...

I agree, however with stuff like this happening, I can see his point.
CNN cuts ties with Donna Brazile after hacked emails show she gave Clinton campaign debate questions

dvdneal said:
I think we should organize a whole bunch of people to join the NRA then kick out the current guy and return them to a group educating people about safe gun ownership and less of a lobbying group.
Click to expand...

I agree, but I would love to see a total elimination of lobbitests. All they do is further corrupt the political system.
 
michaelskis said:
I would love to see a total elimination of lobbitests. All they do is further corrupt the political system.
Click to expand...

You don't think people should be allowed to try to convince their elected officials to pass or repeal legislation? Interesting. Would a dictatorship be preferable (he asked rhetorically)?
 
Maister said:
You don't think people should be allowed to try to convince their elected officials to pass or repeal legislation? Interesting. Would a dictatorship be preferable (he asked rhetorically)?
Click to expand...

Lobbyists are not people. They are agenda centric conglomerates who buy the votes of politicians with a combination of direct funding, favors, campain contributions, and under the table bribes. If you wanted to call up your congressman's office to try to convince him or her to do something, go for it.



On a side note, with all these e-mails coming out about Hillary Clinton, it seems her polling numbers are dropping faster than Bill's pants in a trailer park.
 
michaelskis said:
Lobbyists are not people. They are agenda centric conglomerates who buy the votes of politicians with a combination of direct funding, favors, campain contributions, and under the table bribes. If you wanted to call up your congressman's office to try to convince him or her to do something, go for it.
Click to expand...

You mean like the APA?
 
dvdneal said:
You mean like the APA?
Click to expand...

APA, AIA, and a crap load of other alphabet soup groups. Let's not forget the oil industry who gets subsidies, the banking industry that got bailouts, the automotive industry that got bailouts, the energy industry that through the farm bill gets the government to subsidize corn and soy but not tomatoes and carrots.

Today lobbyists only fuel the two party political system to get their agendas passed with tactics that would be a violation of the AICP code of ethics and human decency. Are all of their ideas bad, no. But to be effective in DC, you need to be corrupt.
 
michaelskis said:
On a side note, with all these e-mails coming out about Hillary Clinton, it seems her polling numbers are dropping faster...
Click to expand...

I follow the betting markets pretty closely for the senate, presidential, and house elections and Clinton's share of the market took a huge plunge Friday and Saturday, but as of yesterday when it appears to be more clear that the FBI really jumped the gun and sent out too ambiguous of a letter without really having any idea of what was in the emails (or even having yet obtained their warrant (which they now have) to actually gather and look into the emails :r:) her numbers have rebounded significantly, recovering about a third of what they had lost.

All the analysis I've read on this is that among those for whom the personal email server, they've already made up their mind. The issue was already known and those who don't trust her because of the server were already not going to vote for her and among those who didn't care about the email issue, they still don't care about the email issue especially since there hasn't been any indication of what is actually in these additional emails. Basically, it's turned into a "meh" issue since Friday.
 
gtpeach said:
That could possibly be short-lived: https://twitter.com/LisaBloom/status/793880513018785792
Click to expand...


WSU MUP Student said:
I follow the betting markets pretty closely for the senate, presidential, and house elections and Clinton's share of the market took a huge plunge Friday and Saturday, but as of yesterday when it appears to be more clear that the FBI really jumped the gun and sent out too ambiguous of a letter without really having any idea of what was in the emails (or even having yet obtained their warrant (which they now have) to actually gather and look into the emails :r:) her numbers have rebounded significantly, recovering about a third of what they had lost.

All the analysis I've read on this is that among those for whom the personal email server, they've already made up their mind. The issue was already known and those who don't trust her because of the server were already not going to vote for her and among those who didn't care about the email issue, they still don't care about the email issue especially since there hasn't been any indication of what is actually in these additional emails. Basically, it's turned into a "meh" issue since Friday.
Click to expand...

(it was a joke about how Bill can't keep it in his pants more than her poll numbers...)


But I think you are correct. There could be proof that Hillary is directly responsible for the deaths of several people, has rigged the entire primary so she would win, and be found guilty of corruption, and the sheeple will still vote for her. It is the same thing with Trump supporters who think that all he has done is say mean things.
 
michaelskis said:
Lobbyists are not people. They are agenda centric conglomerates who buy the votes of politicians with a combination of direct funding, favors, campain contributions, and under the table bribes.
Click to expand...

Just so I understand correctly, you're saying you are opposed in principle to the dozen or so advocacy groups that employ lobbyists expressly to persuade legislators to repeal the Affordable Care Act? Good to know.
 
Maister said:
Just so I understand correctly, you're saying you are opposed in principle to the dozen or so advocacy groups that employ lobbyists expressly to persuade legislators to repeal the Affordable Care Act? Good to know.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. To do the wrong things with the right intentions is still doing the wrong things.


Seriously look into what is spent by lobbyists to get their agendas passed. What if that money was put towards other things? Furthermore, how do you think that Senators and Congressman get so wealthy while in office, especially when their actual income is far more than what their salary from the government lists.

But hey, if you're cool with governmental corruption, I guess you would not care about such things.
 
michaelskis said:
(it was a joke about how Bill can't keep it in his pants more than her poll numbers...)


But I think you are correct. There could be proof that Hillary is directly responsible for the deaths of several people, has rigged the entire primary so she would win, and be found guilty of corruption, and the sheeple will still vote for her. It is the same thing with Trump supporters who think that all he has done is say mean things.
Click to expand...

OMG. There is plenty to dislike about Clinton, but can we seriously stop with the unsubstantiated conspiracy theories that she had people murdered? Please?
 
gtpeach said:
OMG. There is plenty to dislike about Clinton, but can we seriously stop with the unsubstantiated conspiracy theories that she had people murdered? Please?
Click to expand...

You probably don't get much exposure to it, but that sort of conspiracy theory stuff is quite commonplace and pretty much accepted as established fact in alt right circles/websites. You can get a taste of it in the public comments in many publications' online forums.
 
Back
Top